THE inaugural alumni gathering co-hosted by the Malaysian Institute of Defence and Security (MiDAS) and the Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies (DKI APCSS) appeared, on the surface, to be a modest affair, featuring no signed treaties or formal communiqués.
However, the event highlighted the slow, cumulative work through which states build trust, a vital process in a region experiencing intensifying strategic competition.
This practical manifestation of soft power, a concept coined by Joseph Nye to describe influence exercised through attraction rather than coercion, has long been pursued by Malaysia through sustained, unglamorous channels such as the Malaysian Technical Cooperation Programme (MTCP) and the Malaysian Defence Cooperation Programme (MDCP).
Since 1996, 564 Malaysian officials have benefited from programmes at the Hawaii-based DKI APCSS, establishing a network that spans a generation of military officers and civil servants.
The recent gathering aimed to recognise their career achievements, strengthen professional ties, and lay the groundwork for future joint initiatives.
As Keohane and Nye argued, direct cross-border interactions between specialised bureaucrats and military officers form transgovernmental networks that reshape professional perspectives and forge lasting organisational linkages.
While sceptics may dismiss such convenings as mere ceremonial exercises, Keohane and Nye offered a pragmatic counter-perspective.
“Our task is to analyse the politics of interdependence, not to celebrate it,” Keohane and Nye wrote.
They conceded that these gatherings rarely produce sudden breakthroughs.
Instead, their true value lies in sustained, face-to-face contact that reshapes how elites perceive one another across generations, gradually replacing suspicion with genuine institutional confidence.
This confidence serves as a strategic asset that builds resilience, cushioning international relationships long before political winds shift or crises demand immediate action.
For a middle power like Malaysia, which relies on dialogue rather than leverage, this accumulated trust is a core instrument of national security rather than a peripheral concern.
“Baking a larger pie does not stop disputes over the size of the slices,” they said, addressing how soft power assists states in managing divergence.
While soft power cannot eliminate competing national interests, it enlarges the scope of mutual confidence. This enables states to find common ground on shared interests while agreeing to disagree on others within an atmosphere of mutual respect.
The policy implication is both clear and practical: steady, modest investments in relationship-building cost very little compared to the immense value of a trusted contact during a crisis. In an era of complex interdependence, these quiet dividends remain among the most enduring assets of modern statecraft.
Ahmad Tajuddin Mohd Said is attached to the Malaysian Institute of Defence and Security, Defence Ministry.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of Sinar Daily.